xi of abstract writing. Grammatical cohesion can support the cohesiveness of an
abstract. Another reason of choosing grammatical cohesion due to the relation of texture. The cohesive relation that exists in text provides the texture.
To relate to Halliday topic of this thesis which is forming on grammatical cohesion, the writer applies Halliday and Hasan’s 1976
classification about grammatical cohesion as the base of analysis. The reason to choose this classification because it enables the writer to obtain a practical way of
understanding and evaluating the structure of a written in text of an abstract.
1.2 The Problems of Analysis
Based on the background stated previously that there are four categories of grammatical cohesion. The writer has some problems to discuss, they are:
1. What grammatical cohesion exists in the chosen abstracts?
2. What is the dominant type of grammatical cohesion occuring in the
chosen abstracts?
1.3 The Objectives of Analysis
As stated at the problems above, the writer will achieve some objectives to answer the problem of the analysis. They are such as follows:
1. To find out the grammatical cohesion that exists in the chosen
abstracts. 2.
To find out the dominant type of grammatical cohesion that occurs in the chosen abstracts.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xii
1.4 The Scope of Analysis
It is important to limit the analysis and the object of the analysis in order to get a clear and satisfactory result. Therefore, the writer would like to focus only
on the grammatical cohesion namely reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction based on Halliday and Hasan’s classification 1976.
1.5 The Significances of Analysis
The results of the analysis are expected to be beneficial both theoretically and practically. At the theoretical level, the results of the analysis are
expected to enrich the study of grammatical cohesion. On a practical level, the results of this analysis are expected to provide significant contribution in terms of
learning grammatical cohesion, so this thesis can use as reference for another analysis.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xiii
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Theoretical Review 2.1.1 The Definition of Cohesion
The term cohesive has been defined in various ways. Some researchers apply the term cohesion to the surface structure of the text. Cohesion sometimes
been applied to smaller units of language in the text. Other researchers have defined cohesion as continuity in words and sentence structure.
Cohesion may be crudely defined as the way certain words or grammatical features of a sentence can connect that sentence to its predecessors
and successors in a text Hoey 1991:3. A text is in part organized, in part created, by the presence in each sentence of these elements that require the reader
to look to the surrounding sentences for their interpretation. Phenomena that had resisted satisfactory handling within sentence-bound grammars, such as
pronominalization, ellipsis, and sentence conjunction, were found in such studies to be not only well handled once textual factors were taken into account but
capable in turn of casting light on the nature of text itself. Halliday and Hasan 1976:4 state that the concept of cohesion is a
semantic one; it refers to relations of meaning that exist within the text, and that define it as a text.
Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some element in the discourse is dependent on that of another. The one presupposes the other, in the
sense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by recourse to it. When this
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xiv happens, a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, the presupposing
and the presupposed, are thereby at least potentially integrated into a text. Halliday and Hasan 1976:5 also argue that cohesion is part of the
system of a language. The potential for cohesion lies in the systematic resources of reference, ellipsis and so on that are built into the language itself. The
actualization of cohesion in any given instance, however, depends not merely on the selection of some option from within these resources, but also on the presence
of some other element which resolves the presupposition that this set up. For Halliday and Hasan, the organization of text which they term
texture is made up in large part of relationships amongst items in the text, some semantic, some grammatical, which they refer to as cohesive ties.
2.1.2 Types of Grammatical Cohesion
According to Halliday and Hasan 1976 cohesion can be divided into two types: grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion. The previous refer to a
combination of terms sentences that form grammatical aspect. The latter refers to a combination of terms between sentences that form lexical component.
Grammatical cohesion can be divided into four kinds. They are reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction.
2.1.2.1 Reference
Reference is a grammatical cohesion device in a text that can only be interpreted with reference either to some other parts of the text or to the world
experienced by the sender and the receiver of the text.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xv Thomas and Merier 1995:95 state that the term reference, as used by
Halliday and Hasan is an extension of the term as used in philosophy and some types of semantics to mean an act of referring to entities outside the discourse ‘in
the real world’ as it were, although we need to remember that ‘real world’ can include imaginary worlds, such as we find in fiction or myth. Reference in this
sense is not necessarily textually cohesive. For example, when out walking at night, a person might point to the moon and say to a companion, ‘Look at that’. In
this case, that refers to an entity which is identifiable in the situation of utterance. The word that here is an example of noncohesive exophoric reference or reference
outside the text. If, on the other hand, the speaker says, ‘Look at the moon’ and the
companion replies, ‘I can’t see it’ or ‘Where is it?’ with it referring to the previously mentioned moon, and cohesion is established. The latter is known as
endophoric reference or reference to something within the text in this case the short exchange about the moon.
Strictly speaking, of course, it is speakers or writers who refer to entities, using expressions for the purpose, but as a shorthand device we often talk about
words or expressions referring to each other and say that endophoric reference occurs when two or more expressions refer to the same entity.
Endophoric reference is classified into cathaphoric and anaphoric reference. Cataphoric is forward pointing, in the sense that in a text the unnamed
expression, usually a pronoun or demonstrative, appears first and the named expression appears second, as in example below from a computer manual, where
the cohesive tie is indicated in bold type.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xvi
To see how it works, type VER and press ENTER. You will see this on
your screen:
MS-DOS Version 6.00
This forms a cohesive tie with the message MS-DOS Version 6.00. In this case of cataphoric reference, the reader does not fully understand the sense of this until he
or she has read on to the next line in the text. The second type of endophoric reference, and by far the most common,
is called anaphoric reference. This type is backward looking in the sense that the named item appears first and the pronoun appears second.
Examples: 1 All this year’s students passed. It was very gratifying. 2 Jill washed the clothes and then ironed them.
The word It in the first sentence refers to ‘All this year’s students passed’ and in the second sentence them refers to the clothes.
Halliday and Hasan 1976:37 state that there are three types of reference: personal, demonstrative, and comparative. Personal reference is
reference by means of function in the speech situation, through the category of person. Demonstrative reference is reference by means of location, on a scale of
proximity. Comparative reference is indirect reference by means of identity or similarity.
What is known as personal reference is dependent on the use of personal pronouns I, she, he, it, they, me, etc possessive adjectives my, your, their, etc,
and possessive pronouns mine, yours, theirs. Demonstrative reference is dependent on the use of determiners this, these, that, those and adjuncts here,
now, then, there, and comparative reference uses adjectives like same, other,
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xvii identical, better or their adverbial counterparts identically, similarly, less, and so
on, to forge links with previously mentioned entities. 1
Personal reference
West African dwarf sheep are found roaming about the towns and villages in many southern parts of West Africa in small flocks. They
thrive and breed successfully in areas of trypanosomiasis risk. Their
coat colour is either predominantly white with irregular black patches, or black marked with white patches.
2 Demonstrative reference
Be careful of wasp, bees and hornets. These are dangerous pests.
3 Comparative reference
Beecher Stowe gives a moving account of the horrors of slavery.
Clemens’ treatment of the issue in the classic novel Huckleberry Finn is
lighter but more subtle.
2.1.2.2 Substitution
Substitution is used where a speaker or writer wishes to avoid the repetition of a lexical item and is able to drawn on one of the grammatical
resources of the language to replace the item. Halliday and Hasan 1976:88 define substitution in simplest terms as the replacement of one item by another.
According to them substitution is a relation between linguistic items, such as words or phrases and a relation on the lexicogrammatical level, the level
of grammar and vocabulary, or linguistic form.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xviii Substitution, on the other hand, is a relation within the text. A
substitution is sort of counter which is used in place of the repetition of a particular item. For example, in
1 My axe is too blunt. I must get a sharper one.
2 You think Joan already knows? - I think everybody does.
one and does are both substitutes: one substitutes for axe, and does for knows. The example would be entirely possible to ‘replace’ one by axe and does by knows.
It follows that, as a general rule, the substitutes item has the same structural function as that for which it substitutes. In the above example one and
axe are both Head in the nominal group; and does and knows are both Head in the verbal group.
Since substitution is a grammatical relation, a relation in the wording rather than in the meaning, the different types of substitution are defined
grammatically rather than semantically. The criterion is the grammatical function of the substitute item. The substitute may function as a noun, as a verb, or as a
clause. To these correspond the three types of substitution: nominal, verbal, and clausal. The following is a list of the items that occur as substitutes; the list is very
short: Nominal : one, ones; same
Verbal : do Clausal : so, not
In nominal substitutes, one, ones and same can stand in place of Nominal Groups and Head Nouns, as in examples:
1 ‘Would you like some sandwiches?’
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xix ‘Please pass the ones with cucumber in.’
2 ‘I’m having chicken and rice.’
‘I’ll have the same.’ 3
In an experiment, some children were given six cardboard discs each in a different colour. They were then asked to choose the colour they like
best. The majority chose the blue one. The verbal substitute is do. This operates as Head of a verbal group, in
the place that is occupied by the lexical verb; and its position is always final in the group. Here are two examples:
1 ‘I don’t know the meaning of half those long words, and, what’s more, I
don’t believe you do either.’ 2
‘We met in Brazil. Do you remember?’ ‘Yes, we must have done.’
Here do in the first sentence substitutes for know the meaning of half those long words. And done in the second sentence substitutes for met in Brazil.
There is one further type of substitution in which what is presupposed is not an element within the clause but an entire clause. The words used as
substitutes are so and not. In clausal substitution the entire clause is presupposed, and the contrasting element is outside the clause. For example,
Is there going to be an earthquake? – It says so. Here the so presupposes the whole of the clause there’s going to be an
earthquake, and the contrastive environment is provided by the says which is outside it.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xx
2.1.2.3 Ellipsis
In the same cohesive class as substitution, we find ellipsis, or the omission of words, groups or clauses referred to by Halliday as ‘substitution by
zero. When we talk of ellipsis, we are not referring to any and every instance
in which there is some information that the speaker has to supply from his own evidence. That would apply to practically every sentence that is ever spoken or
written, and would be of no help in explaining the nature of a text. We are referring specifically to sentences, clauses, etc whose structure is such as to
presuppose some preceding item, which then serves as the source of the missing information. An elliptical item is one which, as it were, leaves specific structural
slots to be filled from elsewhere. This is exactly the same as presupposition by substitution, whereas in ellipsis nothing is inserted into the slot. That is why we
say that ellipsis can be regarded as substitution by zero. For example, Joan brought some carnations, and Catherine some sweet peas.
The structure of the second clause is Subject and Complement. This structure normally appears only in clauses in which at least one element, the Predicator, is
presupposed, to be supplied from the preceding clause. Note that there is no possible alternative interpretation here; the second clause can be interpreted only
as Catherine brought some sweet peas. Where there is ellipsis, there is a presupposing, in the structure, that
something is to be supplied. This is not quite the same thing as saying that we can tell from the structure of an item whether it is elliptical or not. In other words, we
can take as a general guide the notion that ellipsis occurs when something that is
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxi structurally necessary is left unsaid; there is a sense of incompleteness associated
with it. Ellipsis takes place in similar grammatical environments to substitution.
Thus, we have nominal, verbal and clausal ellipsis. The grammar of Nominal Ellipsis permits the omission of Head Nouns
in a Nominal Group as in example below where two in the final clause means two cucumber sandwiches.
‘Have you got the cucumber sandwiches cut for Lady Bracknell?’ ‘Yes, sir.’
Algernon inspects them and takes two. Verbal ellipsis is common in all short form answers and responses as is
exemplified in example below where there are two examples of verbal ellipsis in responses. In both cases the tie is with save you in the first sentence of the verbal
exchange. In these instances, it is the lexical verb that is omitted. ‘I’ll help you. I’ll save you.’
‘You can’t.’ [Ellipsis] ‘I can.’ [Ellipsis]
And the other example below illustrates clausal ellipsis; the word don’t stands in place of don’t open the door.
Get up quick and open the door. If you don’t, they will break it down.
2.1.2.4 Conjunction
The fourth and final type of cohesive relation that we find in the grammar is that of conjunction. Conjunction is rather different in nature from the
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxii other cohesive relations. Conjunctive elements are cohesive not in themselves but
indirectly, by virtue of their specific meanings; they are not primarily devices for reaching out into the preceding or following text, but they express certain
meanings which presuppose the presence of other components in the discourse. With conjunction, on the other hand, we move into a different type of
semantic relation, one which is no longer any kind of a search instruction, but a specification of the way in which what is to follow is systematically connected to
what has gone before. Conjunction is the term used to describe the cohesive tie between
clauses or sections of text in such a way as to demonstrate a meaningful relationship between them. It is also possible to perceive this process as the
linking of ideas, events or other phenomena. This linking or joining is achieved by the use of conjunctive adjuncts, which are sometimes called cohesive
conjunctives for example, then, for this reason, on the other hand. These are words or expressions that have two textual functions: they indicate conjunction
and at the same time usually indicate the type of relationship that operates between the elements being joined Thomas and Merier 1995:98.
Halliday and Hasan 1976:238 handle conjunctive adjuncts under four main headings: additive, adversative, causal and temporal.
Additive conjunction serves to further the discourse topic. It differs from the paratactic relation of coordination by introducing the new clause as an extra
piece of information, perhaps reinforcing what has already been said. For example,
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxiii The party got to the summit and had their lunch. And they had time for a rest
afterwards. Here the first and coordinates the propositions the party got to the summit and had
their lunch. The second and, however, introduces a supplementary idea. Adversative conjunction is explained as introducing an item of information which
is ‘contrary to expectation’. The expectation may be derived from the content of what is being said, or from the communication process, the speaker-hearer
situation. For example, All the figures were correct; they’d been checked. Yet the total came out
wrong. Causal conjunction marks the relationships of reason, consequence and purposes.
He didn’t pass this time, so he will have to resit. Temporal conjunction specifies the time sequence relationship which exists
between sentences. First he forgot his money, then he forgot his keys.
Previously he had never absent for a day.
2.1.3 The Definition of Abstract
An abstract is a brief but accurate representation of the contents of a document. A true abstract, while it may include words occurring in the document,
is a piece of text created by the abstractor rather than a direct quotation from the author Lancaster 1998:94. It means that an abstract is a brief summary of a
research article, thesis, review or any in depth analysis of a particular subject or discipline, and is often used to help the reader quickly ascertain the paper’s
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxiv purpose. When used, an abstract always appears at the beginning of a document,
acting as the point of entry for any given scientific document or paper. An abstract is a self contained, short, and powerful statement that
describes a larger work. Components vary according to discipline; an abstract of a social science or scientific work may contain the scope, purpose, results, and
contents of the work. An abstract of a humanities work may contain the thesis, background, and conclusion of the larger work. An abstract is not a review, nor
does it evaluate the work being abstracted. While it contains key words found in the larger work, the abstract is an original document rater than an excerpted
passage www.unc.edu. There are two types of abstract: indicative sometimes called descriptive
and informative. They have different aims, so as a consequence they have different components and styles. Lancaster 1998:95 says that indicative abstract
simply describes indicates what the document is about, whereas the informative abstract attempts to summarize the substance of the document, including the
result. That is, an indicative abstract might mention what types of results are
achieved in a study but the informative abstract would summarize the result themselves. Cremmins in Lancaster 1998:96 explains that indicative abstracts
may contain information on purpose, scope, or methodology but will not present results, conclusions, or recommendations. On the other hand, the informative
abstract may include information on purpose, scope, and methods but must also contain results, conclusions, or recommendations. For some purposes, a good
informative abstract might act as a reasonable substitute for reading a document.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxv An indicative abstract is unlikely to serve as a substitute in this way. Its main
purpose would be to indicate to readers of the abstract whether or not they would be likely to want to read the original. For obvious reasons, informative abstract
tend to be longer than indicative. They are also more difficult to write. Indeed, while it will usually be possible to write an informative abstract for an
experimental study, it may be almost impossible to do so for a theoretical study or an opinion piece. For this reason, informative abstracts occur more frequently in
science and technology than they do in the social sciences or humanities.
2.2 Applied Research Review
The idea on writing this thesis based on some linguistics books that supply relevant information to the topic. The writer refers to some related analysis based
on the cohesion in discourse. 1.
Kunto 2009 has analyzed cohesion on editorial of “Deutschland’s” magazine. He found the existence of grammatical cohesion and lexical
cohesion in the magazine. Grammatical cohesion is classified into four kinds; they are reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. The
reference consists of 82 sentences 68.33, substitution consists of 4 sentences 3.33, ellipsis consists of 2 sentences 1.66, and
conjunction consists of 32 sentences 26.66. Lexical cohesion is classified into four kinds; they are repetition, synonymy, hyponymy, and
antonymy. Repetition consists of 21 sentences 17.5, synonymy
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxvi consists of 2 sentences 1.66, hyponymy consists of 3 sentences
2.5, and antonymy consists of 3 sentences 2.5. 2.
Arfanti 2002 has analyzed cohesion in Melayu Serdang folklore. She analyzed three types of Melayu Serdang folklore; they are Panglima
Bukit Cermin legend, Puteri Burung Kuau myth, and Anak Orang Miskin tale. The result shown that grammatical cohesion devices are
more dominant than the lexical cohesive devices in the three types of the folklore. Endophoric pronoun reference is the most dominant
grammatical cohesive device in the three folklores.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
xxvii
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
3.1 Data Source
